February 19th, 2010
05:00 PM ET

What if U.N. is right about Iran building a nuclear weapon?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Same old, same old from Iran... we're not seeking nor do we believe in nuclear bombs.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/03/09/iran.flag.jpg caption=""]
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei says the Islamic Republic's religious beliefs consider weapons of mass destruction to be "symbols of genocide," and therefore they are forbidden.

How different from a draft report from the UN nuclear watchdog suggesting just the opposite. The international atomic energy agency report says Iran may be working secretly on a nuclear warhead for a missile - and lists ways the country has been defying UN orders.

For the first time, the IAEA states concerns that Iran may be trying to develop nuclear weapons right now.

Iran continues to insist its nuclear program is meant only for civilian energy and for medical use. Sort of like, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman."

The UN keeps passing resolutions against Iran - three so far - and some nations are pushing for another resolution. What do these resolutions mean exactly? I don't understand. Pres. Obama gave Iran a deadline of the new year to show they were making progress. What did that deadline mean exactly? I don't understand.

A new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll shows 6 in 10 Americans think the U.S. should take economic and diplomatic efforts to get Iran to shut down its nuclear program. Haven't we been doing that? Only about a quarter want the U.S. to take immediate military action.

But if diplomacy doesn't work, nearly 60 percent support military action. 71 percent think Iran already has nuclear weapons. Swell.

Here’s my question to you: What now if the U.N. is right about Iran building a nuclear weapon?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Tim in New York writes:
Military action will only feed the existing resentments towards America’s lack of even-handedness in the region. If we're going to insist that the region be free of nuclear weapons, we'll have to disarm everyone (friend and foe alike). Otherwise, it's just going to add more fuel to an already incendiary "cause."

Joe writes:
If the U.N. is in fact right, then we've all just entered an even more dangerous situation. So much for diplomacy. We need to support the movement within Iran that is looking to change the power structure, but at the same time increase sanctions. We need to make it known that we are friends to Iranians, but not to their leaders and government.

Terry in Indiana writes:
Iran has called for nuclear weapons states to disarm and for the Middle East to be a nuclear weapons free zone. Has this happened? Do they have a right to protect their country? I know the guy running it is crazy-but he’s got a point, doesn't he?

Margie writes:
I wish our government would bite the bullet and deal with Israel's nuclear program, which is also illegal and unregulated… If you look at the problem from the Iranians’ point of view, they need nuclear bombs to protect themselves from Israel in a mutual assured destruction kind of mentality.

Nabeel writes:
I wouldn’t be surprised if the U.N. got the information about Iran building a nuclear weapon from the same place they got the intelligence about WMD in Iraq. Same lies at a different time. For those countries who are yelling the loudest and thumping their chest about Iran, maybe they should handle the problem themselves and leave the U.S. out of it.

Cliff in East Rockaway, New York writes:
At some point, implied threat is the only deterrent. To paraphrase former President Clinton, a nation's best day might be the day that they use a nuclear weapon, but their worst day is the day after.

Filed under: Iran
soundoff (181 Responses)
  1. Joe R - Houston

    So what? Since they'd have to test one before deploying one in anger, why don't we wait till the entire world knows which side they want to be aligned with?

    February 19, 2010 at 3:52 pm |
  2. Tina Texas

    So what if they are right? Israel will blow Iran off the face of the map before their missles can reach the Usa and we are broke and cannot afford a new war.

    February 19, 2010 at 3:59 pm |
  3. John from Alabama

    Jack: The UN is usually the last to know anything about weapons. It might be the first to know about disease and famine, but weapons no way. I beileve it is time for the United States, the European Union, and Russia to give Iran an object lesson. I do not believe tougher sanctions will accomplish anyting at this point. Destory one of their nuclear facilities or explode a small nuclear device in the Iranian desert. Make some glass out of the sand.

    February 19, 2010 at 4:00 pm |
  4. David Sisters OR

    If they are right?? We've known that they are working on one for a long time, we also know they want to destroy Israel and give that land back to the Palistinians. The irony here is that if they use the bomb on Israel, Israel will retaliate, and it will turn the whole region from Afghanistan to the Mediteranean into an uninhabitable desert and a region of refugies. On top of that hundreds of thousands of Palistinians in Israel will die. Madness........

    February 19, 2010 at 4:02 pm |
  5. Greg Turman

    If the U.N. is right about nuclear weapons, we will send Jimmy Carter & Miss America over to pass some tough bomb control laws in Iran.

    If the U.N. is wrong we will say that Bush lied.

    Greg Turman

    February 19, 2010 at 4:03 pm |
  6. Joan Gilbert-Croteau

    What I'd like to know is how long is the international community going to realize the longer they wait for putting sanctions, the closer every country will be in danger of anniliation. And when are the people of Iran going to do something to get rid of the tyrant who wants nothing but to build hatred around the world?

    February 19, 2010 at 4:04 pm |
  7. Kyle, Irvine, CA

    If the U.S was not engaged in 2 wars, I would 100% support military action. But I honestly think Israel will beat us to it. Until then, the United Nations needs to impose severe economic sanctions and if that doesn't work, then I think we all know what needs to happen...

    February 19, 2010 at 4:09 pm |
  8. BigD GottaGoTell It, Minnesota

    I Repeat; Years Ago a Reliable Just Retired Military General(reliable?) said that IRAN Already had a NUCLEAR BOMB way Back Then + I Believed Him Then + I Do Believe "DAT DEY DO," Even NOW!

    As for Iran, Knowing that They Have "THE BOMB," Gives Iran the Security + Confidence to "ACT OUT" in the Face of WORLD WIDE Opposition!

    Do Something About It? Except for GOING to WAR IMMEDIATELY, We Just Gotta PLAY OUT the WAR GAME in Long Division.

    We Have No Choice after Going Into Iraq + Getting Rid of Iran's Biggest Enemy, 'SADDAM HUSSEIN!" Thanks NEO-CONS!

    February 19, 2010 at 4:09 pm |
  9. Mike in St. Paul

    It would largely be our fault. Wasn't one of the reasons we did not topple Hussein in 1991 because he would help keep Iran in check?

    February 19, 2010 at 4:09 pm |
  10. Conor in Chicago

    Without an international coalition that mirrors what the world saw in Gulf War I invading would be a disaster. It's that simple. We'd be better off letting them get nuclear weapons and then adjusting to the new reality-something America always does.

    February 19, 2010 at 4:12 pm |
  11. Jason, Koloa Kauai

    Who are we to decide who can build nuclear weapons and who can't? If we had some sort of self perceived moral superiority to other people on the planet I think that flew out the window when we started wars for oil if not way sooner. All we can do is lead by example and start disarming nuclear weapons to show that we are becoming more evolved. Telling others they can't build nukes while sitting on massive stockpile is a hypocritical farce.

    February 19, 2010 at 4:12 pm |
  12. Rick McDaniel

    Iran is going to continue to develop a nuclear weapon, until it succeeds.

    Iran is looking for the power to spread Islam throughout the world, and they will continue until they succeed in doing that.

    Precisely why I see WW III looming in the future.

    February 19, 2010 at 4:13 pm |
  13. Larry from Georgetown, Tx

    Sanctions and other statements don't do any good if there not followed up by stopping all food, etc from going to Iran but some of the U.N. nations sell them weapons to make money. This is just like having a kid that is bad and you punish them by saying, no TV tonight but then you give in so there really is no punishment. We're whimps but do not need to go to war again without them doing something like firing a missle at the U.S.

    February 19, 2010 at 4:14 pm |
  14. Michael D. Knox

    As the only country to use nuclear weapons on civilian populations, the country with the largest number of nuclear weapons, and the country that has invaded more countries than any other, we are on the moral low ground. Let's lead by example and disarm.

    Michael D. Knox
    Tampa, FL

    February 19, 2010 at 4:16 pm |
  15. A. Smith, Oregon

    Jack, your question is entirely questionable. The existing evidence clearly indicates IRAN lacks the ability to even build a nuclear fuel rod which is Grammar school in comparison to building a nuclear bomb.

    The existing evidence clearly indicates the small amounts of enriched Uranium IRAN has would immediately be noticed and flagged by the 24/7 inspections and security cameras of the International Atomic Energy scientists if they were enriched to 90% or higher.

    The tiny Medical Reactor Iran is trying to refuel to produce medical isotopes to treat its population was built by US company's. The small amount of Uranium Iran has, is barely enough to refuel that tiny reactor. Iran will then have to figure out how to build reactor fuel rods, or make a trade for acquiring those Uranium fuel rods.

    The UN is entirely, absolutely and completely wrong about IRAN building a bomb at this time. It is Bush League Logic and the WORLD knows where that got America when it is applied as Gospel.

    February 19, 2010 at 4:17 pm |
  16. Bizz, Quarryville, Pennsylvania

    If the U.N. is right if then we have a big problem. They need to be stopped but we cannot do it alone. Jack, this is one problem that can definitely be blamed on President Bush for invading Iraq the moral enemy of Iran. After invading Iraq we took away the balance of power. Iraq would have stopped Iran from making a nuclear bomb. There really isn't much we can do, especially alone. We are already fighting on two fronts and in debt up to our eyeballs. We will need cooperation and help from other countries. I pray that it will come because Iran with a nuclear bomb is the most dangerous thing that can happen to the world.

    February 19, 2010 at 4:18 pm |
  17. bob, oshawa, ontario

    Jack, despite what the UN thinks Iran is doing, the fact remains Iran has the right to pursue a nuclear program for peaceful purposes for its energy needs. Until it's proven otherwise, baseless accusations are what many in the U.S. and its allies are counting on as an excuse to invade Iran. What about Israel, India and Pakistan? Did they not build nuclear weapons despite prohibitions? Maybe you could do a tap dance around that poser.

    February 19, 2010 at 4:20 pm |
  18. IKHAN from san jose ca

    the question has to be evaluated on the premise that we want to have a nuclear weapons free world. Or do we??

    If that premise is correct than what happens to the nuclear arsenal of India,Israel, Pakistan & North Korea. And where are we going with the promised reduction in the arsenals of the permanent security council members?

    Israel & Iran have been at each other's throat threatening attacks for quite some time. Iran would never have the capability of attacking US.
    Israel has one of the deadliest armies in the world with nuclear weapons, quite capable of defending itself & we know what Mossad is capable of. So that is a deterrent in itself.

    Reason dictates that we develop a workable relationship with Iran & alleviate their security concerns just like we do Israel's. If the UN is right than the more reason that we do so taking other neighbors of Iran on board who feel threatened by both Israel & Iran.

    February 19, 2010 at 4:22 pm |
  19. S, Michigan

    Has the UN ever been right on anything related to such matters? You mean I should trust the same UN Sec Council that authorized action against Iraq because of something in a tiny container? The IAEA doesn't have the tool nor the equipemtn to make any such claims- they often work with information that is months old or obsolete.

    February 19, 2010 at 4:23 pm |
  20. JENNA

    What now if the U.N. is right about Iran building a nuclear weapon?

    Of course Iran is building a nuke(s) and why not? We have them, most of the world has them. Do we want Iran dictating whether or not we can have nukes? No.

    So really I don't care.

    The nation that should be concerned is Israel. If they keep poking the bear the bear they will unlease hell to them..

    But hey, isn't this what the Bible thumpers are praying for?

    Roseville CA

    February 19, 2010 at 4:25 pm |
  21. kent, NJ

    If the U.N. is right about iran building a nuclear weapon they should also say if israel has nuclear weapons. If israel has nuclear weapons then iran should be allowed to have them. Iran has not attacked another country in over 200 years and that is a fact. Israel has unilaterally attacked iraq, syria, lebanon, and continues to attack the palestininas. Everything israel does to another country or group of people is considered self defense but if someone attacks israel it is called terrorism. The U.S. of course has nuclear power plants and 10,000 nuclear weapons and we have used them twice against japan. The word is hypocrisy. This comment is as moderate as I can make it. I hope it will be posted.

    February 19, 2010 at 4:25 pm |
  22. JW Georgia

    If true, there seems to be few options remaining, one of which might be World War Three in the nuclear age. Another is to allow a nuclear arms race to grow in the volatile middle east. And the third, which may include one or both of the above, is to be Bush-dumb and pre-empitively strike Iran, and if the entire population is not eradicated and if the entire country is not completely turned to rubble, the problem will eventually arise again. There appears, without the intervention of the rest of the civilized world, to be no good solution.

    February 19, 2010 at 4:32 pm |
  23. hampster

    Iran is definitely building a nuclear weapon. Considering the close relationship of China and Russia to Iran and the America's lack of credibility within the world community there is little to be done about Iran. Sanctions can be ignored or circumvented. Guess the world will just have to sit back and enjoy the ride.

    February 19, 2010 at 4:34 pm |
  24. Leslie

    If the UN is right the world should take action against Iran by using sanctions and as a last resort military action. If Iran is developing nuclear weapons their allies should take immediate action because Iran is not to be trusted with that type of power.

    February 19, 2010 at 4:35 pm |
  25. tony

    JACK ITS a observation I have made and no one pointing it out or calling out professionals in the news media about it. Why are forks disrespecting the office of the president every day by referring to a sitting president as OBAMA,as BARACK OBAMA, or even HE, all of this while giving the due respect to other past presidents.eg Canda Crowley says the afghanistan war is BARACK OBAMAS war although it was passed on by PRESIDENT BUSH I have somewhat of a explantion...you see subconsciously they cannot accept him as the president of the United States. Is it because he is black?THESE people got to accept it and move on,forget that he is black, at least respect the office of the president of the US. A good place to start is with the heavyweight reporters in the media

    February 19, 2010 at 4:36 pm |
  26. Don in Iowa

    I think Israel will find a way to handle the matter- kind of like they did not (wink, wink) take out that Hamas guy.

    February 19, 2010 at 4:36 pm |
  27. Jerry Jacksonville, Fl.

    Sit tight Jack, Israel will take care of that situation, unlike the United States that start wars for oil and to keep the defense industry making money for the Republicans, Israel will start it to win and eliminate an enemy.

    February 19, 2010 at 4:37 pm |
  28. Adam in Newfoundland

    Let Israel take care of it. After all, they're gonna be Iran's target of choice if the Islamic Republic is building a bomb, a contention I find highly questionable to begin with.

    I'm sick of seeing American-and, in the case of Afghanistan, Canadian-troops killed, maimed, screwed up in the head, their families destroyed.

    The Israelis have a robust military and nucler weapons. Let them take care of their own damn business, for a change.

    February 19, 2010 at 4:38 pm |
  29. Jenny from Nanuet, New York

    Despite what some people say, Iranians are NOT suicidal. They SHOULD be able to have nukes to protect themselves. Why do we allow Israel to have them while not acknowledging it? Iran would never attack us or Israel knowing it would provoke an imminent attack. Let them have nukes if we have Israel have them-and we do.

    February 19, 2010 at 4:42 pm |
  30. Terry, Chandler AZ

    I don't think the U.S., the U.N., of the IAEA has any right to regulate who can not have nukes. If both the U.N. and ite IAEA decided that the U.S. can no longer have nuclear weapons would we abide by their directive? Of course not. Perhaps the U.N. and the IAEA should declare possession of nuclear weapons by any country as being illegal.

    February 19, 2010 at 4:50 pm |
  31. booger

    The U.N. was wrong on Iraq. Just leave it to Obama, he has extended a hand. Just give it time. Obama will make it all right. He will talk Iran out of their ambitions like Reagan did with the Soviets. That is if Iran is truly trying to build a bomb. Obama will fix it all. Just give it time. His new soft handed approach will take a bit to remove the sting of Bush's closed fist. Just give it time.

    February 19, 2010 at 4:51 pm |
  32. Ed

    Well why not just invade them? After that we can invade Yemen, Somalia, North Korea, etc. Just make a list and start checking it off. Of course, I don't know where we'll get the troops to accomplish all of this since most of those proposing military action are chickenhawks who won't volunteer for military service.


    February 19, 2010 at 4:51 pm |
  33. Meg from Troy, Ohio

    The longer the world waits to deal with Iran and its secret development of a nuclear weapon, the longer it will take for the situation to be defused. Iran is a powder keg that only needs a spark to touch it off. Should the world wait for Iran to send a nuclear bomb into Israel and start World War III? The world needs to deal effectively with Iran now. Or pay dearly with lives later.

    February 19, 2010 at 4:51 pm |
  34. Eric Silveira

    Iran's posture is aggressive & dangerous. Next thing you'll see
    is Iranian warships patrolling Long Island Sound like US warships are patrolling the Persian Gulf & Middle East waters

    February 19, 2010 at 4:52 pm |
  35. Jack - Lancaster, Ohio


    If so, would not this be the first time the U.N. got something right?

    February 19, 2010 at 4:55 pm |
  36. Paul Round Rock, Texas

    Then let the U.N. take care of it and we can give them some drones to send in to end all the factories making such weapons. We should not take direct action and we will not need to Isreal will if indeed they have a nuclear weapon they will not let it happen.

    February 19, 2010 at 4:58 pm |
  37. Tom in Desoto, Tx

    Iran is probably building nuclear weapons but there's no one to stop them. Certainly not the U.S. If Bush were president he'd probably say attack from both Iraq and Afghanistan and meet in Tehran which would be a pipe dream. If there is an attack on Iran and it's weapons facility it would probably come from Israel.

    February 19, 2010 at 5:00 pm |
  38. David Gerstenfeld

    It's all about OIL. The U.N. needs a way to satisfy China and Russia's needs in order to gain their support. Cut off the head of the snake (buying Irans'oil & selling them any refined). I don't reccomend sanctions; I've been impossing sanctions on my wife's spending for over 20 years.
    David, Las Vegas

    February 19, 2010 at 5:02 pm |
  39. Antonio from Washington D.C.

    Then we're not only screwed, but we're dead meat also!

    February 19, 2010 at 5:03 pm |
  40. Carl

    My answer is just to simple, who cares. It would make no sense at all to go to war with Iran just because we think they have a nuclear weapon. Even if they do, many countries have this power, including the United States, who I might add, is the only country to date to have used this power against another country. Like I have said many times before, we, the United States need to stop being the police of the whole world and start paying better attention to what going on in the United States and our own people.

    February 19, 2010 at 5:03 pm |
  41. Curtis in Philadelphia

    Jack, our military is already spread too thin; as long as the U.S. military is in both Iraq and Afghanistan, we just don't have the military capacity to take on Iran. Our using military action against Iran now, would be like a bald guy imploring the "comb-over" to create the illusion of a full head of hair, and that's not a good look, trust me.

    February 19, 2010 at 5:04 pm |
  42. Joe CE

    THe Us is probably right. If they have over-estimated,,, it is only a matter of a short time. We must be ready to eliminate their capability. We shouldlook for ways that do not involvr large a number of casualities.

    February 19, 2010 at 5:06 pm |
  43. frank

    Use sanctions. We can't afford another war. We're stretched too thin as it is. You want to see the deficit really blow up? Invade Iran. Forget elections, we couldn't afford them. That would make the GOP happy. They could take all their Wall Street winnings and sit in the dark and freeze with the rest in NYC.

    February 19, 2010 at 5:07 pm |
  44. pat in michigan

    Jack, Do you think for one minute the leaders if Iran don't read world history. Hell ,they probably studied it at Harvard.They know that we will try everything short of armed conflict till it is too late.then we will be into a nuclear fight
    with the whole world condeming us instead of Iran who forced our hand.
    we will go down the same path again . Those who dont study history are condemed to repeat it.

    February 19, 2010 at 5:10 pm |
  45. Jack in Boynton Beach FL

    Iran is without a doubt building a nuclear weapon. Iran will be added to the growing list of nuclear powers. Why the excitement? What do you think we will do if they decide to use it? What do you think Israel will do? The cold war hasn't really ended and the politicians must have something to scare us with in every election. Irans' nuclear capability will simply be added to the politcal talking points.

    February 19, 2010 at 5:11 pm |
  46. marlene

    The International community must follow the money and place sanctions on all monies flowing into the Iranian government. Stop their money flow and you will sharply curtail their nuclear development. UN sactions haven't worked, so far, now the UN must stop the money from getting to their government. The United States has taken some steps to achieve this, other countries must follow. Marlene in Mich

    February 19, 2010 at 5:13 pm |
  47. richp the poconos

    The question is does Iran have a nuke that works, building one and getting it to go bang are worlds apart.

    February 19, 2010 at 5:13 pm |
  48. John DeMartini

    If they have a nuclear weapon so what. They are no threat to us. they don't have the rockets to get a weapon here and even if they did they would be commiting suicide given the amount of retaliation power we possess. W could reduce Iran to rubble and glass in a matter of hours. As far as terrorists obtaining a weapon there are far less stable regimes that have nuclear weapons to be had.

    February 19, 2010 at 5:13 pm |
  49. Darren - Detroit

    Look at all the WMDs we give Israel and India ... if only Iran kissed up to US like they did.

    February 19, 2010 at 5:17 pm |
  50. Tony from Southport, North Carolina, USA, Earth

    This administartion will do nothing to stop Iran any more than Jimmy Carter did when Iran held our people as hostages.

    They will eventually develop a nuclear weapon that can be used against our allies, and then the situation will be more intense. If Obama can't do anything now, what makes anyone think he can answer the call in the event Iran has the bomb?

    Israel will most likely be on their own.

    February 19, 2010 at 5:18 pm |
  51. Ray in Nashville

    Jack, if Iran does develop nuclear weapons, it will mean a pre-emptive strike from Israel. That in turn will probably mean war. Then again, the thought of a nation like Iran having nuclear weapons is probably concerning to most of the Arab states. Of course, in our infinite wisdom, we destroyed the most powerful enemy Iran had in that corner of the world, all to restore the Bush family name. What have we done?

    February 19, 2010 at 5:21 pm |
  52. Gigi Oregon

    And pray tell...who's going to pay for this war. My great-grandchildren (not born yet) are going to pay for Bushes/Cheney war. Please respond Jack.
    Maybe, just maybe if we cleaned up our own government we wouldn't have to worry about Iran. Yaw...Think?
    I wish the media hadn't told the whole world how stupid the "we the people" of the U.S. are. From what I read on your blog we are in a downward spin.
    What if the U.S. changed the whole world to be puppets like us but lost it's soul.
    It was clear after eight years the Republicans do not know the definition of diplomacy and with Obama/Clinton this past year the U.S. people don't recognize diplomacy when they hear it. Or maybe they've been brain washed into believing your weak. It takes great strength to be a diplomat.

    February 19, 2010 at 5:23 pm |
  53. Sean

    The Ayatoliah Alikhamenei is Iran's supreme religious leader. He said Iran does not believe in nuclear weapons. He's a very religious person so we should take him at his word. Glenn Beck and George W Bush are religious men, I know they would never lie.

    February 19, 2010 at 5:24 pm |
  54. Eric - Houston

    I expect they are. Unfortunately, neither the Russians or the Chinese have been particularly helpful about making sanctions strong and universal enough to really make a difference. Right now continuing to work toward their cooperations is about all we can do that is likely to be effective at anything but strengthening the current regime. Hopefully the Russians and Chinese will realize that Iran could give these weapons to the Chechens or the Uighurs some day if they don't start working seriously with us on non proliferation. Other than that we will likely have to accept what Iran is developing and be ready to smash them hard with our nuclear weapons if they ever use one themselves or provide them to another bad actor that does. We can do that by ourselves and the problem with a country behaving badly is they cannot get out of the way.

    February 19, 2010 at 5:24 pm |
  55. joseph


    If the UN is right about Iran building a nuclear weapon, then we should:
    1). Bring back the draft.
    2). Send the troops into Iran and secure the nuclear capacity.


    Brooklyn, New York

    February 19, 2010 at 5:24 pm |
  56. Joyce

    The US needs to use strong sanctions agains Iran – in all matters – before the leaders will understand we mean business.

    As far as the CPAC folks are concerned, it's high time they start thinking about the USA as a "whole" rather than just themselves and the GOP. Also, Gov. Palenty shouldn't be commenting on anything these days as he's been attempting to balance the budget in MN by cutting any and all programs that affect the poorest people of the state. Shame on him!!!

    February 19, 2010 at 5:29 pm |
  57. Pat

    The leaders in Iran has tried to mislead people in the past. Remember the hidden facility that was discovered? That facility was not supposed to even exist. What is really bad is how the Iranian people are being treated. They overthrew the Shaw in the 70s and installed what they thought would be a better government. As it is looks now, the current government in Iran is worse then the Shaw. The current government will accuse anyone not following it's rule with going against "God's wishes" (or similar) and through them in jail or execute them.

    In Iran today there is no democracy. Iran is being run by the Ayatollah with 'elected' puppets in front.

    February 19, 2010 at 5:31 pm |
  58. Joe M (Mn)


    Nothing, thats what! We cannot continue to police the world when we are going bankrupt. If the rest of the world is concerned about Iran and their nuclear intentions I say it's time for another country to take the reins. We have already exported our jobs so I say; lets export the worlds problems.
    Joe M (Mn)

    February 19, 2010 at 5:34 pm |
  59. John Nesheim


    Let's put it into perspective. An individual in your neighborhood owns a catapult and a pile of rocks. You feel threatened and want to build a catapult and gather some rocks. Your community tells you that if you build your catapult and start collecting rocks you will be shunned and actions will be taken to disadvantage those living in your house.

    Force Israel to destroy it's arsenal of nuclear weapons and Iraq would probably welcome a proposal that they limit their nuclear development to peaceful use.

    Remember the one about the goose and gander?

    February 19, 2010 at 5:34 pm |
  60. Terry Gnsbg,IN "Hoosier Hillbilly"

    Jack you said; "we're not seeking nor do we believe in nuclear bombs". I understand this is what they say, but don't "WE" have them & China & Japan & Isreal... and who knows 'who else'. Is it right for the "US" to say other countries can't have them when "WE" do!!
    They [ to begin with won't be as effective or dangerious as ours] and if "WE" fine out for sure they have them "WE" can just add to their supply, all though the nuclear warhead "WE" send will not add to their supply.
    ((I see no Problem!))

    February 19, 2010 at 5:36 pm |
  61. Wayne Chirdon

    Mr. Cafferty,
    My Question to all is.
    How do santions work, when a good portion of the developed world appears. I use the word appears, because one doesn't relly know, who's who or who isn't doing what there ask to do. or who's honoring them. (Russia, China), and who knows 'isn't secretly) I mean dosen't Russia contribute material.and tecnology to help build reactors for Iran? what's up with that?

    I'd like to share that,
    My neighbors are Iranians, and r friendly wonderful people. They suggestTheir current leader is a wolf in sheeps clothing.


    Wayne R. Chirdon

    February 19, 2010 at 5:36 pm |
  62. Sean

    Sell Israel what ever weapons they need. Make Israel promise not to use them on Iran. Then just sit back and wait for the price of gas to go up.

    February 19, 2010 at 5:43 pm |
  63. Lance, Ridgecrest, Ca

    Jack, first of all, the UN is right. Iran is seeking nuclear weapons, that is a fact, not a question. When will they get it, that is the question. When they get a viable warhead, the end result will be that they will control the entire mid-east, because they will be willing to use the weapons. Think about that, an ideology that believes suicide is a viable way of using power, what would stop them from using the biggest suicide bomb of all? Not us, we don't have the guts! The administration has already shown they don't have the stomach to do anything about Iran.

    February 19, 2010 at 5:46 pm |
  64. Michael Alexandria, VA

    It means that the Mossad will have an enhanced interest in which Ayatollah is Supreme Leader, Jack.

    February 19, 2010 at 5:47 pm |
  65. Cori

    Let's get rid of nukes altogether. Why is it that the U.S. has to police the world? How many countries have nukes already besides us?

    The world needs to wake up and realize that we are destroying ourselves, and having nukes is proof that we have bad intentions in sight someday. C'mon!

    February 19, 2010 at 5:48 pm |
  66. Maryanne

    America better start breeding and producing more men and women to fight another war. While the US was spreading itself thin fighting "other wars", the sleeping monster, Iran, was silently arming itself with deadly nuclear power. As it stands now, good luck with threats and sanctions because that's all the US can afford.l

    February 19, 2010 at 5:55 pm |
  67. Dennis North Carolina

    wait and watch is all the world can do with out taking over the country which i do not see the UN, or any other body or country doing. if they use the weapon or threaten countries with than they should be completely eliminated from the world.

    February 19, 2010 at 5:56 pm |
  68. Annie, Atlanta

    If the UN is right, I have no doubt Israel is already on top of it.

    February 19, 2010 at 5:58 pm |
  69. Adam Simi Valley, CA

    If you keep threatening a child and never follow through, soon he will just start ignoring you and have no respect for you. That's Iran. Someone, us or Israel need to start inflicting real harm on these guys. i guess the Obama policy is to keep talking and threatening until one of our cities glows in the dark.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:00 pm |
  70. Maria

    It's not a surprise about Iran's intentions toward building nuclear weapons. The imporant thing right now if what to do about. Is the UN capable of leading an international sanction against Iran? What choices do we have? It's scary.



    February 19, 2010 at 6:03 pm |
  71. Remo, from beautiful downtown Pflugerville, Texas

    Jack, a U.N. resolution is like a drunk promising not to drink anymore. Just give the GPS coordinates to Israel. Problem solved.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:04 pm |
  72. Sean

    I heard Iran wouldn't be nuclear till Dec. 23, 2012.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:04 pm |
  73. John, Fort Collins, CO

    If the United Nations is correct that Iran is close to having a nuclear warhead, there is only one opinion that really matters: Israel's. As opposed to the rest of the world, Israel doesn't draw lines in the sand backed by empty threats. They will take whatever action necessary to turn any Iranian nuclear weapons into former nuclear weapons. And it will be a real mess. My advice to everyone in this country is to keep your gas tanks full, fill up the mower can, and line up alternate forms of transportation.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:05 pm |
  74. Abe Iowa City, Iowa

    It's not the UN resolutions against Iran that Iran is concerned about. It's the 66 unenforced resolutions passed by the UN Security Council against Israel and 29 other resolutions that had the support of nearly all other nations that would have been adopted but were vetoed by the US. A resolution by the Security Council is meaningless if it is differentially enforced depending on which nation it is against.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:05 pm |
  75. steve- virginia beach

    If Afghanastan is any indication, Israel will have already attacked Iran and WWIII will be over by the time our bumbling Trainee-in-Chief makes any decisions.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:05 pm |
  76. katiec Pekin, IL

    I truly find it hard to believe that 60% of the American people support another war. We are already involved in two wars which we cannot afford, lives being lost and financially.
    It has to be a worldwide project if Iran has to be dealt with. No more big, bad boys politics.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:07 pm |
  77. Rick in Atlanta, GA

    At last we've found the Weapons of Mass Destruction!

    February 19, 2010 at 6:07 pm |
  78. Charles in ohio

    Jack: Two things need to take place. Iran needs a new leader and change the religious leaders. That would bring Iran into the family of world order. I don't think that will happen so Iran could become a big hole in the ground!

    February 19, 2010 at 6:08 pm |
  79. joe m

    if the UN is in fact right then we've all just entered an even more dangerous situation. so much for diplomacy. we need to support the movement within iran that is looking to change the power structure, but at the same time increase sanctions. we need to make it known that we are friends to iranians, but not to their leaders and government. let's just hope that this is yet another report that over estimates the actual capability.


    February 19, 2010 at 6:11 pm |
  80. michael armstrong sr. TX.

    The Jews going to bomb-bomb-bomb Iran and Iran is going declare war .

    February 19, 2010 at 6:12 pm |
  81. Terry Gnsbg,IN "Hoosier Hillbilly"

    Iran has called for nuclear weapons states to disarm and for the Middle East to be a nuclear weapons free zone, has this happened, do they have a right to protect their country?
    I know the guy running it is crazy-but hes' got a point – doesn't he?

    February 19, 2010 at 6:12 pm |
  82. Scott Stodden

    Jack I think the time for sanctions is over we've had sanction after sanction and time and time again they have proven not to work. These Iranians and President Mahmmoud Achmadinajad are not willing or wanting to negoiate and if the U.N. and the United States knows they have a nucelar weapon then we should respond immediatly with military action. The time for games is over Mahmmoud!

    Scott Stodden (Freeport,Illinois)

    February 19, 2010 at 6:17 pm |
  83. Tim

    Military action will only feed the existing resentments towards the USA's lack of even handedness in the region. If we're going to insist that the region be free of nuclear weapons, we'll have to disarm EVERYONE (friend and foe alike). Otherwise, it's just going to add more fuel to an already incindiary "cause".
    New York

    February 19, 2010 at 6:17 pm |
  84. Eric Silveira

    The solution is simple. We must declare & enforce a nuclear-free zone for all of the Middle East countries except Israel, which should be allowed to keep it's 150 nuclear weapons because it has not signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Israel's neighbors have signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Also, Israel has the right
    to defend itself with nuclear weapons if necessary.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:18 pm |
  85. A. in DFW Texas

    I doesn't matter, until your species bans all nuclear weapons in all nations, all nations will have eventually nuclear weapons. you cannot stop other countries no matter how much you try from getting them.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:18 pm |
  86. Gary - Woodhaven, Michigan

    I guess we learned nothing from Iraq and WMD.

    We can continue to run our lives based on assumption, disbelief, and fear, or we can reach out with these religious beliefs I hear everyone spouting: faith, hope, and love. Which is it?

    February 19, 2010 at 6:19 pm |
  87. monique

    We pray, because the powers seem to balance with the alliances already map out.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:19 pm |
  88. Andrew

    We should nuke'em, and lose'em. Show them what a nuke does.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:19 pm |
  89. Nikki Martin


    Why do we (the U.S.) have to take the lead this time? Are you worried that life as we know it will be destroyed? Our horrible economy is already doing that as we speak!

    February 19, 2010 at 6:19 pm |
  90. John Hardy

    What about Israel? 250 undeclared nuclear weapons, a history of wars and an aggressive policy of taking land from Palestinians. Compared to this Iran is no issue.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:19 pm |
  91. Dr. T. Johns, Atlanta

    President Theodore Roosevelt’s speak softly and carry a big stick might have worked here, but it didn't have a chance. The present administration showed its hand. There is no stick in this administration's foreign policy as far as Iran is concerned. We can call them all the names we want and try to isolate them. Many in the world loved this dove approach. They were rid of President Bush who they greatly disliked. They even gave Obama the Nobel peace prize! But, this approach may also netted the world a nuclear middle east. Iran, Israel will have them, and let's not think Saudi will set idly by without a equal deterrent if they don't have it already. What a mess.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:19 pm |
  92. Nabeel

    I wouldnt be surprised if the UN got the information about Iran buiding a nuclear weapon from the same place they got the intelligence about WMD in Iraq. Same lies at a different time.

    For those countries who are yelling the loudest and thumping their chest about Iran, maybe they should handle the problem themselves and leave the US out of it. I think the time has come where the US start to worry about the problems within its borders and not what Mike Huckabee and AIPAC tell it to worry about.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:20 pm |
  93. James in Idaho

    Jack, now we don't jump to a conclusion based on any given source. Remember Curveball? I'm sure the Iraqis do.

    Now, we "trust, but verify" to borrow a phrase from Reagan. Imagine all the good that might have been done and all the bad that could have been avoided, had Bush done exactly that. Obama needs to succeed where Bush failed and check the sources carefully, and then , but only then, if it is found to be true, and the source to be entirley credible, then we engage in any way necessary, and with necessary and adequate use of force.

    Until then, UN or not, it's all just hearsay.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:20 pm |
  94. spktruth

    Hey Jack: Warmongering much! How many wars do you neocons want the american people to fight. It is a fact that Obama talks big about reducing nuclear weapons internationally while he is prepared to give billions to the nuclear power industry, No insurance company would insure them in 30 years. The nuclear industry itself will not deliver a loan in the last 30 years....talk about hypocrisy? It is true that WMD is against the Koran, and there is NO evidence (except that coming from the Zionists) that in fact Iran is enriching uranium. To the dumbed down american sheep who dont know the difference between nuclear power for heating etc, or nuclear power for medical...it appears CNN is at it again. You zionists like Wolfe would just love to have american blood and treasure to fight another misguided unwanted war for Israel. You are a hypocrite and a war monger. Get over it Jack.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:20 pm |
  95. Dee Maida

    What if US is right??? I would say – US would be dealing with another Iraq scenario...Please don't make another mistake.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:20 pm |
  96. Michael from Ft. Hood, Texas

    Iran is and has always been a liar. They learned it from us and our other allies.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:20 pm |
  97. Austin

    Well jack that means that America gets what it wants an excuse to continue out their plan of running pipe lines and stealing all their oil. It's all part of a bigger plan where the people are lied to and forced into a nwo just like this fake recession moving us towards one world currency and governement. Wake up America.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:20 pm |
  98. Tony

    Very simple solution: Target the Regime not the People.

    1. Ban international travel of high level officials
    2. Freeze gov't official's personal bank accounts
    3. Stop the import of Gasoline into Iran
    4. Don't recognize Ahmadinejad as the president of Iran

    This game will be over in a mater of months.

    Tony G

    February 19, 2010 at 6:20 pm |
  99. Jeremy, Ontario Canada

    Do what Americans do best: infiltrate, destroy, rebuild

    February 19, 2010 at 6:21 pm |
  100. Fernando (Canada)

    So what if they are?? The USA and others have Nuclear weapons , what makes anybody think they are any more dangerous in Irans hands. You dont see them running into other countries with there armies . You should be asking people who is more dangerous with them and why should some countries not be able to defend themselves from possible invasions.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:21 pm |
  101. Leila Fakhoury

    Doesn't the UN say the same about Israel? In fact, Israel is already assumed to HAVE 200-400 nuclear warheads. Israel has DENIED UN and IAEA inspections and the world turns a blind eye. They are legally not allowed to have these nukes.

    Iran is in the Nuclear Treaty, if they follow the rules, they can have nukes. Bottom line.

    Also, doesnt Israel have much more violations of international law than Iran does? So why do you trust Israel with nukes, and not Iran?

    Israel would be the first country to throw a nuke on every Arab neighbor they have, so why does the USA allow them to have nukes without signing the NPT, and without allowing inspections?

    February 19, 2010 at 6:21 pm |
  102. James200809

    if iran has nukes & i know for a fact the usa has some active nukes already on standby i personally think if they plan on attacking the us
    we should nuke iran first before they nuke us it would save millions of lives but thats only if we fail talking them out of it

    February 19, 2010 at 6:21 pm |
  103. Chicago Guy

    I think U.S should not jump going into Iran like they did with Iraq, If Iraq was a mistake Iran will be painful mistake. Iraq was all about possible WMA Iran could be positive possibility in not finding WMA but also seeing them in Action against U.S interests. The best should be to put stronger sanctions and still following pressure tactics.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:21 pm |
  104. Claudia, Houston, Tx

    I would think the question that needs to be asked who they intend to use a nuclear weapon against otherwise everything appears to be an assumption.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:21 pm |
  105. Margie Parko

    I wish our government would bite the bullet and deal with Israel's nuclear program, which is also illegal and unregulated. Israel poses a major threat to Iran, and It has attacked it in the past. Israel has hundreds of nuclear bombs and the ability to deliver them. If you look at the problem from the Iranians point of view, they need nuclear bombs to protect themselves from Israel in a mutual assured destruction kind of mentality. We need to require all governments in the region to be nuclear free.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:21 pm |
  106. Erik, Florida

    I will support your stance on Iran, Jack Cafferty, once you have extended the same harsh rhetoric toward Israel and the countries that helped Israel to illegally acquire nuclear weapons and keeping them out of international oversight.

    At that point, anyone concerned about Iran may have a point, but until Israel have been dealt with – pfffft!

    February 19, 2010 at 6:21 pm |
  107. Joseph Feng

    Iran will be in a better position to defend itself against a foreign invasion. It it a very good defensive weapon. It is not much use as an offensive weapon because they would not have enough, and attacking one of the established nuclear powers would lead to massive retaliation.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:22 pm |
  108. Parker

    If Iran has nuclear weapon, the U.S. has no other choice but a diplomatic solution. There is no doubt that Iran will use a nuclear weapon against the US if they are provoked. I supported a military solution before they obtained a nuclear warhead. However, if Iran has a nuclear weapon, we have to be careful about how we interact with them, just as we do with North Korea.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:22 pm |
  109. jim Blevins

    So what - if Iran is building a nuclear weapon, it will be found out soon enough. Iran would never dare use a nuclear weapon because many more would be used on them. All the diplomatic capital that we are spending on Iran could be much better used in improving our economy. If our government would spend its time on our economy and stop wasting resources on this sort of irrelevant crap, we would be much, much better off.

    Jim, Craig, CO

    February 19, 2010 at 6:22 pm |
  110. Mari, Utah

    One of the reasons so many hate the U.S., is that we say "do as we say, not as we do"! We, have enough nukes to kill the Earth and everyone in it over and over and over! But...... no one but our friends are allowed to have nukes! Arrogance.

    Why not get rid of ALL nukes? No one can use nuclear weapons without serious consequences and severe damage to ALL mankind, so why have them at all? Yes, I know my idea and view is Liberal, it is also Christian! Any one who supports nuclear weapons is a terrorist.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:23 pm |
  111. Alex Beatty

    Well can we afford to do a nuclear disarmament of Iran? I know, Lets borrow the money from Halliburton. Lets see if where Halliburtons loyalty lies and ask them to donate some percent of logistics for this one.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:23 pm |
  112. Stephen Jackson

    We should let Israel strike the two sites that we know for sure that are being used to build their nukes. I know recently the US did the war games and it didn't look too good if Israel does a strike but I think since Iran talks about destroying Israel and the Jews – lets green light them and plan for a back up if Russia or China gets bent out of shape.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:23 pm |
  113. Ed

    The only country to destroy two cities with the bomb is now holy then thou to only allow their friends to own a bomb.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:23 pm |
  114. M.J.Byers

    When I hear all of this on Iran it reminds me very much of the same reporting leading into the Iraqi situation; and makes me recall a quote from a great american, Yogi Berra, "It's like deja vu all over again".
    Get ready.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:23 pm |
  115. victor ventimiglia

    When is the United States and its "allies" going to address the realilty of the Iraeli nuclear arsenal and the impact this has had on the Iranian development of their defensive capabilities?

    February 19, 2010 at 6:23 pm |
  116. Curtis in Wichita

    UN sanctions mean exactly squat. If we are serious about stopping Iran's pursuit and use of nuclear weapons we need to isolate them through economic sanctions and naval blockades. The UN has neither the will or the means to stop anything – and the leaders of Iran know it and will continue to share high fives after every announcement that they are not pursuing nuclear weapons.

    Wichita, KS

    February 19, 2010 at 6:23 pm |
  117. Jerry

    Why is it that we always assume there is some "magic, painless" answer the US can pull out of its hat anytime another country does things we think jeapordize our interests? There is no good solution. All we can do i put diplomatic and economic pressure on Iran, try to convince other countries in the world that it in their interest to do the same, and failing that, take some sort of military action. With respect to military action, it seems the best option we have is to target the Republican Guard, the segment of Iranian society that seems to be pushing this as targeting the nuclear sites themselves seems problematic as they are hidden and somewhat protected from attack.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:23 pm |
  118. Birddog in mississippi

    What diplomacy has done so far is exposed Iran's hand. We have a better chance of getting Russia and potentially China on board for sanctions at this point than we have had in the past. We need them on our side for this in order for sanctions to work.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:23 pm |
  119. Bill - upper New York state

    Jack, what do you not understand about the word 'may'? Is the report based on fact or suspicion? We went to war in Iraq on suspicion. Do we want to make the same mistake again? Reagan said 'trust, but verify'. That should be the basis for diplomacy, not bombs.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:24 pm |
  120. Jon Gunning

    The world has already seen the results of US intelligence and the cherry picking that the Bush administration did about Iraq. Any deal with Iran should include that Israel destroy the nuclear weapons they have and sign the non-proliferation treaty. There must be a balance of nuclear weapons in the middle east. Israel cannot continue to bully Arab nations. There must be a strong deterrent. You Americans are the only ones yelling about this so shut up and mind your own business for a change. I just hope China has the stones to veto any resolution that the US brings before the security council. Just like your government has vetoed EVERY resolution every brought against Israel.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:24 pm |
  121. Richard Allen

    Over and over we get comments from CNN about what to do about Iran–sanctions, war, whatever.
    Why is nothing ever said about the 200 to 400 nuclear weapons Israel is building and stockpiling? Perhaps Iran is concerned about this and the threat it poises to its future safety.
    Israel is hardly willing to stop its nuclear programme. Why then should Iran be given an ultimatum about stopping it from possibly building a weapon? The US is not destroying its nuclear arms. Does it have the right to demand another sovereign nation do so? It all smacks of hypocrisy to me and a double standard of judging others.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:24 pm |
  122. jack kass Toledo, Ohio

    What should the U.N. do? What can the U. N. do? Diplomats and politicians can't agree on basic issues. Untill the U.N. presents a totally united front; buy no Iranian oil (fat chance). We will be forced to live with a Nuclear Iran.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:24 pm |
  123. Leila Fakhoury

    Also, SANCTIONS DO NOT WORK. Just so you know, any action will KILL THE GREEN MOVEMENT within Iran. The Persians may hate their government and leaders, but they 100% love their country and 100% support a nuclear program. Put sanctions and it only harms the population, and that gives Ahmadenijad the upper hand on getting the Green Movement in his side.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:24 pm |
  124. Sid Thomas

    Bomb Israel into oblivion and kick everybody who supports Zionism and state sponsored assassination, as in Dubai,.out of this and every nation on earth. They are pathological liars and psychotic killers, along with every Catholic like you, Cafferty, who shill for them. When the truth is hate, hate is the truth. .

    February 19, 2010 at 6:24 pm |
  125. Richard

    I don't really see the problem here. When the US finally gets Isreal to admit to nuclear weapons maybe Iran will also. Isreal is just as much a loose cannon in the Middle East as Iran.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:24 pm |
  126. The Broker.

    "But they are right Jack. Just like they believed in 2002. But then they were all split of different avenues to go for a solutuion. Now? There is Recess of equity, and where it may be available in the future. So! Where will the Magnetic-Field be the stongest?"

    February 19, 2010 at 6:25 pm |
  127. mike-sey

    Relax, Jack, nothing has changed, and the IAEA is only concerned about the possibility that something undisclosed sometime might have something to do with developing a warhead. Iran may be telling the truth about Iran's nuclear ambitions. Even Saddaam told the truth about his WMD's as we discovered to our chagrin after too many deaths and too late. Stop beating the war drums

    February 19, 2010 at 6:25 pm |
  128. Jon M

    Iran's leaders have demonstrated a distinct contempt for most civilized nations for well over two decades. Why would believe that any statement or econimic action of ours would sway them towards behaving in a responsible manner? I think it would be more effective to attempt to influence their friends, Russia and China, to join with the rest of the world in condeming and isolating this tyrannical and murderous regime.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:25 pm |
  129. maliheh

    as an iranian american jack~i pay my taxes by the way unlike some illegals here in california LOL ,first of all khamenei do not represent islam or iran ,he is an uneducated thief and a pedophile,he comes from an old tribe and represets "sharia law" thats not a form of islam and "educated muslim" will tell u this ,he is working on getting the a-bomb beleive that he plans on wiping out israel as well,we need an complete "oil embargo"and crippling sanctions on iran for at least 1 year

    February 19, 2010 at 6:25 pm |
  130. Theodore R. Wade Jr.

    Not to worry. Israel is not going to allow Iran to build anything close to a nuclear weapon. Iran will suffer the same fate as Iraq decades ago.
    And rightly so.The world needs to know where the line in the sand is drawn. Cross the line and you are toast.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:25 pm |
  131. John

    Of course Iran is building Nukes, and maybe if Iran hadn't displayed such flagrant abuse of human rights, there might be room for a decent conversation in America as to why they are pursuing them. Iran is virtually surrounded by US forces, in Iraq, Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kuwait, Bahrian, Qatar, the UAE, as well as an increasing presence in Pakistan. Don't forget that we placed Iran on the "axis-of-evil" list while we butchered Iraq and hanged Saddam, and we have incentivized the possession of nuclear weapons by warmly embracing Pakistan's government, regardless of lingering ISI ties to the Taliban and the AQCon sale of Nuclear technology to the very country we are trying to contain, Iran. We need to start assessing the threats we present to the other side, namely our reckless war policy and Israel's possesion of nuclear weapons which the refuse to admit to the IAEA.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:25 pm |
  132. Sedley Jeffers

    Until the US and the UN think like Israel, Iran will will believe they are cowards. Therefore, Only Israel has the guts to attack Iran and they will for the own survival. Iran is saying to the US and UN "You can only bark, you can't bite' What a pity.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:26 pm |
  133. mike

    here we go again. when is america going to learn we can't solve the middle east's problems. we're broke and the military's overstreached.
    even if iran has a nuke how does that affect us with the arsenal we have. this is israel's problem. let's stop holding their hand and let them fight their own battles.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:26 pm |
  134. Nick CT

    what did we do with North Korea. I think they have nuclear weapons. I wonder what goes on in the minds of people that we should take military action against Iran. It will be a long dragged and a costly war, right now now we are deep in debt with the wars. I think that the only choice we have is the diplomatic and economic sanctions.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:26 pm |
  135. John in Los Angeles

    The North Korean sanctions haven't worked so why would they work against Iran? Delaying is only buying the Iranians more time to develop their weapons.It's time for Obama to show he is willing to do what it takes to protect our country against a true threat and prove the conservatives wrong.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:27 pm |
  136. Homeless D in Atlanta

    How friendly is Iran with China?

    After all, if we decide to take any military action against Iran we will need China to bankroll it.

    Perhaps the other countries that might join us in some military action are also beholden to China.

    So, the main thing that will decide our actions against Iran is whether China will continue to lend us the money to wage war.

    What the action should be? Diplomacy does not work. Sanctions do not appear to work. That leaves us with very little choice.

    When people were so scared of being nuked in the 50s, when we thought that school children hiding under desks would be safe, I not once thought that in my lifetime we would be this close to nuclear war.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:27 pm |
  137. Al from 1st in the nation "New Hampshire"

    I think we should do what we did in Iraq. Rally the people in the country to get momentum going against Iran. Have the President go on T.V. and claim they have trucks running around the desert with secret biological weapons. Have Hillary go to the U.N. and say Iran has ties to Al Qaeda. and then "Shock and Awe" them back to the stoneage. Worked so well in Iraq and Afghanistan.......didnt it?

    February 19, 2010 at 6:27 pm |
  138. Brian in Rhodes Michigan

    We can not be the police of the world. We may have already destroyed our country by trying to be. We may never get out of debt that the last two Wars have cost, and for what are we safer? Where are those weapons of Mass Destruction? We need to help the Iranian people rise up and do something about their own Government, not threats of attacking. Israel will keep Iran in check.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:28 pm |
  139. lynne j.

    Nothing. There is nothing the U.S. can do since a previous president called them out and started this round of mess and then proceeded to go into Iraq and not finish Afghanistan.

    Any military might that could have mitigated this is all for naught unless there is a draft and money to pay for it falling out of the sky.

    But we only have ourselves to blame for this. If this country hadn't interfered with their government in the early 1950s because of oil, this wouldn't be happening now. What you sow, you reap.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:28 pm |
  140. Bob Schellenberger

    Jack, The first thing we need to do is recognize that this is a world problem not a US problem. The world needs to work together to solve this problem and soon. I have no doubt that Iran is working on a n atomic bomb. We may have a few years before they have a viable bomb. Start now to make the UN or another world agency or a large group of nations willing to work together to stop this. Clearly the nations within 500 miles of Iran should feel the threat and be glad to support and help with the need to control this problem.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:28 pm |
  141. David P Vernon

    Tucson, AZ – Contrary to common belief, Iran is not a monolith. The clergy, with "final" say, assert they do not want "the bomb", and an Ayatollah who lies can never be promoted to Grand Ayatollah. The legislative assembly, elected from all walks of Iranian life, provides a veneer of democracy. Overwhelmingly, from the opinion polls, the general public in Iran also does not want "the bomb." The third force is the problem. The former Revolutionary Students, legally a third independent part of the government, control the Basij (who murdered Neda Soltan and rigged the last election.) The Basij want the bomb, and all the power, and Ahmedinejad is their man. They are the folks who took our embassy and will not return it, a violation of international laws that go back for centuries. Our only hope is a confrontation between the clergy and the Basij, which they both lose, with the popular legislative branch taking over. There is not much we can do to drive the situation in a direction favorable to our interests. Carter and Reagan blew our chances with Iran, long ago. Now we are stuck, and the Iranians are stuck, with Ahmedinejad and his thugs.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:29 pm |
  142. Curtis in Wichita

    @Michale Knox...

    Yeah, let's unilaterally disarm – because that approach ALWAYS works with bullies.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:29 pm |
  143. Allen in Hartwell GA

    Jack, I don't know about anyone else, but I'm tired of worrying myself to death about what Iran, or North Korea, or Moldor is doing. Either we make smoking holes where these countries are now or we learn to live the fact that they might have one of what we have thousands of.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:29 pm |
  144. Matt

    The military option is only feasible if it involves providing arms and logistic support to the opposition parties in Iran. The government of Iran accuses the West of interfering anyway, even when it doesn't. If they have to fight an internal, armed opposition, then their focus on building nuclear weapons will be diverted.

    Saint Augustine, Fl

    February 19, 2010 at 6:29 pm |
  145. Peg

    We don't have to do anything. Israel has a short fuse & a history of pre emptive strikes. They will strike the nuclear sites, and Iran has made it clear that they will retaliate by taking out Saudi oil fields, in additions to other strikes. We will have to pay at the gas pump for all of this folly of course.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:29 pm |
  146. Gloria

    There is no need to do anything. We have nuclear weapons so there is no need to fear Iran.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:30 pm |
  147. Barry - Ashburn, VA

    Is there a single instaqnce where sanctions have worked in getting a dictatorial goverment to change its actions? Even military action, such as bombing Germany and Japan in WW II, didn't cause overthrow of their governments. Obama did turn the screw on the sanctions late last year, obviously to no avail. The one possible good interpretation of the situation is that the UN didn't say that Iran WAS developing weapons; they only said they did not have enough cooperation from Iran to allow inspections to see what Iran was doing with its "illegal" enrichment program.

    Why do you expect any different results than with North Korea, India, and Pakistan?

    February 19, 2010 at 6:30 pm |
  148. ronin

    Iran has 500K plus troops and forces surrounding them. What do you think their gonna do? Push and Mossad will eliviate the situation. US forces cannot.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:31 pm |
  149. Henry

    Dear Jack: It appears we did not learn from History . Hitler told the League of nations he would stop his aggression and they believed him. It is the same with Iran., They say they will stop enriching Uranium, but buy time while the International community argues among themselves giving Iran time to employ more centrifuges and build plants underground, Talk will only get you so far. Action will be needed. The question is whether we will act BEFORE they have weaponized or will we as in World War 2 be late in tryig to save ourselves. The time to act is now, whether unilaterally or with some form of consensus. They will not hesitate to use their weapons on the WEST/

    February 19, 2010 at 6:32 pm |
  150. NC Jeff

    Hi Jack
    I answerd a question simular to this one some time ago. It was read on air.
    During the presidential election, right around the same time that the DNC screwed Hillary I replied to a question and it didn't even get posted. Since the election, none of my replys to your questions get posted on your blog. You and/or your network probably didn't like what I said so what??? you blackballed me? I took CNN and you at your word regarding accurate and unbiased reporting. What a crock that turned out to be huh?

    Answer to this weeks blackball question? We should tell the world that we are going to nuke Iran in 7 days unless they completely and without delay and smoke curtains comply with all UN Mandates. If they do not comply, NUKE EM!

    February 19, 2010 at 6:32 pm |
  151. Richard Green

    You have mischaracterized the UN report. There is nothing in there that says Iran "may" be building a nuclear weapon. There is a statement that Iran may be enriching more uranium to the 20% (medical use) level than was first thought. No evidence. Iran has been reporting its activities as required. Iran has even reported on specific new U.N. requirements that they will not follow. For Iran to be building a weapon they would have to use their entire inventory of enriched uranium. That has not happened. Iran does not have enough centrifuges to enrich to weapons grade even if they could sneak their whole inventory passed the inspectors AND our surveilance and our monitoring of activities in the ground there.
    Please be more accurate.
    Rich Green
    San Clemente, Cal.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:33 pm |
  152. Tony

    There's nothing we can do about an Iranian nuclear bomb. Military action is out of the question since our military is too small and overstretched already. Economic sanctions won't work either. Basically, other nations built the bomb and the world didn't come to an end. We're just going to have to get used to the idea of a nuclear armed Iran and hope deterrence works.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:33 pm |
  153. Karl

    Iran is a third world nation. It does not have an atom bomb. On the other hand, Israel has about two hundred atom bombs. Israel is the country that attacked USS Liberty and killed 34 Americans. Did we bomb Israel back then? NO.... So why Iran? If we changed Iran's government in 1953, we can do it today. But we are not. Why? Guys, no more wars for Israel. We can not pay for these wars anymore. Please just wake up.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:33 pm |
  154. Manny

    Hello Jack,

    U.S. has eliminated two of Iran's biggest enemy( Saddom,Taliban), Why Does iran need a bomb?.
    If you going to attack, will you announce it if you mean it.?(Iran attacking Israel).

    February 19, 2010 at 6:33 pm |
  155. Linda in Arizona

    ...Sort of like, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman."

    I'm no Clinton lover, but THAT was a cheap shot. Also, conflating a sexual peccadillo with having a nuclear weapon is reaching. I know you don't like the Clintons though, so I get it. You claim not to understand about Iran. I don't understand either. What is it about the character of the average US citizen that makes them so paranoid? I'm thinking it's guilt. Do you really fear a nuclear attack from Iran? I don't. Why would they do that, even if they could, which they still wouldn't be able to do, even if they had a bomb. This increasing belligerence toward Iran is more about Israel anyway. If we attack Iran, which would be crazy, it will be because Israel feels threatened.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:34 pm |
  156. Barbara in NC

    6 in 10? I'm only one of the 4.

    Their neighbors, Iraq and Saudi Arabia have enough money to FUND a war. We're already in bankruptcy because of at least ONE of TWO unfunded wars.

    If Saudi Arabia and Iraq (Haliburtan Money) want to fund it, fine. But go all out – no holds barred. Hit them hard and don't stop until they say NO MORE. Just like WWII.

    By the way, will this "war" be declared? Or just "wanted" by some president that wanted to kill the man that wanted to kill his daddy?


    February 19, 2010 at 6:35 pm |
  157. Flyingwolf, Manchester NH

    What are we supposed do to Iran? nuke them before they nuke us? What' do you think that going to start? Probably a whole world-wide nuclear war that makes earth look like a super nova just as I've paid off my mortgage.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:35 pm |
  158. evinia bruce

    hmmm..lets see..the USA has the largest stockpile of nuclear weapons in the world ..and the ONLY country to have used them....Israel ,[provided by the Americans]....Pakistan.. India ..have nuclear bombs.....
    what should the US do??..NOTHING...Iran has not attacked a country for over 100 years ..something that cannpt be said of the others ....IF..Iran does develop a nuclear weapon it is only for a deterant .......what would the US ..[or any country .]. do in their shoes?.
    .where has the world heard of "weapons of mass destruction" before?...oh ..yes......and how did that work out??..
    Kelowna B.C canada

    February 19, 2010 at 6:35 pm |
  159. Richard Green

    ....sorry, it should read "on the ground" in the second to last sentence of my comment.

    San Clemente, Cal

    February 19, 2010 at 6:36 pm |
  160. Lee

    It is fair to say that Obama's carrots approach has given the US more opportunities to use sticks. Under the Bush administration remember we lost a lot of trust from the international community after crying wolf when there wasn't any real danger to America or the community at large from Iraq. In fact the mere suggestion of attacking Iran at the time created a lot of resistance, but now that isn't the case.

    The reality is that this situation is a very difficult one but we know that a “go at it along” approach is not a very good option. Getting other key nations involve is better than not. Showing the world that we were willing to meet with the Iranian leaders and provide assistance with non-weaponry nuclear technology, helps America, Israel, and other supporting nations to act by any means necessary to keep Iran from getting real "weapons of mass destruction".

    February 19, 2010 at 6:36 pm |
  161. David Gage

    Jack, have you ever read the book "True Freedom – The Road to the First Real Democracy"? Well, if you had then you would learn that the human animal is a pretty dumb one and the majority seem to want to fight and kill particularly in the event they can either take control of another or simply meet their god's desires to destroy the opposition. Knowing this, the only option available to those who do not want more than one more war (unless the nations wanting one agree to it in advance) would be to first rearm all of our nuclear missiles with incendiary devices, then turn the controls of these over to the UN who when redesigned also would let any nation which uses its military to harm another that their nation will be totally burned down! This would happen only one more time provided those who have the largest military systems today agree to it as no nation could ever win again and their taxpayers would be totally against this type of ignorant animalist behavior. Hey, then maybe we could also prevent ourselves from going bankrupt!

    February 19, 2010 at 6:36 pm |
  162. Mical

    I don't believe a word that comes out of Iran. Their religious leaders have zero control over the militia gov't that's taking hold within. They've (Iran) been playing on our politically correct attitude of "not to directly accuse them of anything" and continually taunt us with their lies. Unless public uprise from within Iran takes place, we're headed for another conflict in the mideast.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:36 pm |
  163. Al - Weymouth, MA

    Jack – Rather than compare Iran's statements re its nuclear program to Clinton's lie regarding Monica Lewinski, a more apt comparison would be to the Bush/Cheny lies regarding Iraq's WMD.
    Remember? – "We know where they are", "Smoking gun in the form of a mushroom cloud", "A grave and gathering threat" etc., etc.
    We have seen the devastating results of that propaganda campaign – the parallels between then and now regarding Iran are striking. The same forces would have us make the same mistake again regardless of the cost to our country. Remember the adage – you can fool me once...............

    February 19, 2010 at 6:37 pm |
  164. Jeff in Minnesota

    Bomb shelter time Jack. If they do not provide a delivery mechanism, they have Hamas and a number of other terrorist organizations that will be more than happy to provide delviery services anywhere in the world.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:38 pm |
  165. Ronald Burris

    I think the real question is WHY do Iran and the rest of the Middle East hate the United States.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:41 pm |
  166. Terry Sliger

    If I lived in that neighborhood I would have every man woman and child working to produce a bomb. After the 1953 coup engineered by the US that overthrew a democratically elected goverment and the US support for Iraq during the iran iraq war, what would you be doing? China, India, and Pakistan, what a great group live amoung.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:42 pm |
  167. John in Los Angeles

    The U.S. must take action before Israel does. If Israel strikes first the results will be a regional war. If we strike we will have at least the private backing of the Arab world. We know if we deliver minimal airstrikes against Iran that it will not result in a war unless Iran escalates the situation. I think Iran know full out war with U.S. is not in it's interest so better for us to do it rather than Israel.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:42 pm |
  168. Carmelo, NJ

    Jack where was the UN when Israel, India & Pakistan none of them are signature of NPT built nuclear weapons?
    lets face it, all this hoopla about Iran is about defanging another Israel enemy. While Iran has never attacked another country except under self defense with Iraq, Israel has attacked its neighbors under the fog of self defense and has defied over 100 UN resolutions and continue assassinations of Palestinian freedom political activists in foreign countries and maintaining an oppressive occupation of 4.5 million Palestinians and gets the green pass from our leaders and main stream media especially CNN!!
    Attacking Iran we will again be shedding blood of our military personell and treasury for Israel !!!

    February 19, 2010 at 6:45 pm |
  169. B Edwards

    The UN saying that Iran "might" be developing a nuclear weapon is like someone pointing to a pregnant woman and saying "She might have a baby in her belly". Of course Iran is creating a nuclear weapon and the whole world has know this for more than a decade.

    The reality is that the UN is a meaningless debating society that issues idle threats in the form of UN Resolutions with scary language like "Serious Consequences" which everyone on the planet knows will never be enforced unless the United States steps up to enforce the resolutions.

    The last time that UN Resolutions were enforced was by George Bush in Iraq and we all know how supportive Democrats were of that move. The irony is that the Democrats are the very ones who constantly overemphasize the importance of the UN and diplomacy.

    Let's cut to the chase, Iran has a free pass to work tirelessly on developing a nuclear military threat. No matter what the UN says, China and Russia will veto any action against Iran and no threat exists from America because the whole world knows that Obama already is in way over his head with the domestic agenda.

    Unless Israel takes unilateral action which Obama would never support, Iran has not a worry in the world about anyone getting in their way. Let them develop their bomb and then wait for them to give it to Hamas, Hezbollah, or Al Queda to use on Israel or the US. Then we can talk about what action to take as we all slowly die from radiation poisoning.

    It doesn't have to be this way but at least we can all say, "I told you so" and then die needlessly on a permanently radioactive planet.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:46 pm |
  170. samuel

    What country in there right mind would dare want nucler war, besides the good ol u.s. and israel? After the savage barbarian act of 1945 aug.6th and 9th , and the amount of WMDS, NUKES, and BIO, THE GOOD OL U.S.A. posses who wants nuclear war.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:46 pm |
  171. Semo Rantamaki

    Learned anything from Iraq ? Hundreds of Billions of dollars spent.. Economy in the tank...Thousands of soldiers dead... Nearly one hundred thousand Iraqi civilians dead.. Nearly 4 million refugees... Day after day of bad news for the past 6-7 years... Violence still going on (albeit at a lower pace)...
    Sure we can afford it ? The last wars were and are expensive lessons...
    And the hyperbole that Iran wants to wipe Israel off the map... What the Farsi translation of that statement meant was that Israel would be like the Soviet Union, not a literal wipe out... Besides, wouldn't the Palestinians be wiped off too in such a scenario ?
    But, hey you better make sure Israel is the only hegemon in the region, so nobody can criticize its policies....
    Best yet, put all options to a vote not on the unelected Security Council of 5 permanent members, but on the General Assembly of nearly 190 nations.. See how much support you get for the military option..

    February 19, 2010 at 6:47 pm |
  172. Mike O'Brien, Champaign IL

    Jack, the Bush Doctrine of pre-emptive war is madness and a war crime. We didn't attack Germany and Japan until we were attacked, and gave them what-for when we had to. We didn't attack an even more powerful Soviet Union, and maintained the peace, saving millions of lives, until they stood down. The largest, most powerful country in the world needs to exercise restraint, not attack anyone that scares us a little. The same logic should be used by the Arab countries, in not attacking Israel for having nuclear weapons. We give them that license when we threaten Iran. Let Iran be, they are a puny, poor country, and not a serious threat to us.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:47 pm |
  173. Michael H. in Albuquerque, NM

    Iran has the right to defend itself from the pschopathic ambitions of Israel.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:47 pm |
  174. Alex in Gig Harbor

    I wonder how many who call for invading Iran are also concerned about government spending and the deficit. It is impossible to start another war, cut taxes and cut spending simultaneously! Much of our current debt is from running two wars "off the books" for so long.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:48 pm |
  175. Theresa

    If anyone doesn't believe it they've been asleep @ the wheel. The US entered Iraq under a false premise–WMD–which were not found. Granted the US hasn't used nuclear weapons but maybe Iran thinks why can't they lie since the country questioning them did. Maybe the old adage "practice what I preach NOT what I do T'aint working.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:49 pm |
  176. Bronson from Saylorsburg, PA

    Even if the U.N is right and Iran has a bomb, diplomacy and sanctions still work. Those Iranians must not have any common sense if they think they can build an army, fight and win a war when there have been multiple sanctions imposed and sanctions that will be imposed if they continue to enrich uranium. Also, lets remind our government that diplomacy always works against rogue nations.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:49 pm |
  177. Lynn, Columbia, Mo.

    Maybe the UN should slap them with an embargo–nothing in and nothing out. It worked with Cuba and the Soviet Union. Or let Israel take care of it. The Massad works in mysterious ways.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:49 pm |
  178. Frank Hamer, TX

    It's about time for a Diplomatic and Military response. Ring Iran with an alliance of its neighbors, the U.S., the UK and France. Iran should understand that the alliance will respond in kind, Nuclear weapons included, to and provocation or aggression against treaty signatories OR their allies. Collective Security, NATO style.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:50 pm |
  179. Tom from Vermilion, Ohio

    When the US is ready and has its anti-missle laser deployed. Invite Iran to try and launch some unarmed missles. Before it leaves Iranian airspace, laser it down. Let them think about it! This technology exists and is being tested. Point out that lasered warheads can detonate after the missle has been destroyed.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:50 pm |
  180. Jake, Buffalo NY

    Then WWIII has officially begun...

    February 19, 2010 at 6:51 pm |
  181. Richard Green


    What to do? If diplomacy fails, apparently 60% of Americans want us to take military action. Are we nuts?! First, it's illegal. Second, Iran has never in its long history been the first to attack another country. Third, an attack would spark a war whose extent and number of victims we cannot imagine. Fourth, Iran poses no direct threat to America and has never threatened America. What in the world has happened to Americans?

    Rich Green
    San Clemente, Cal.

    February 19, 2010 at 6:53 pm |